Additional VRS Providers Comments
17 05 2010All..
Here are more comments from other VRS providers.
It is interesting to see how several VRS providers differ in their analysis of NECA rates. Keep in mind, however, that FCC has listed what are allowables and not allowable cost items for estimating reimbursement rates. I will just list just a few not allowable cost items (not all comprehensive, though): training of interpreters, video phones, cost of installing (such as installers), and limited R&D. Because of that, it affects the reimbursement rate calculation.
Happy reading ;-]
eyes open & thumbs up,
Ed
Long LInk:
PAH: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7020458106
Purple: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7020459147
SorensonVRS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7020459335
What are Purple’s views on the fact that its stock dropped to nine cents per share today despite announcing a deal with a federal program?
What are Purple’s views on the fact that it used a loophole to stop filing public financial reports after years of claiming to be the most transparent provider?
What are Purple’s views on the fact that it has less than three months to come up with the $20 million it owes the FCC under the standstill agreement it signed in February?
What are Purple’s views on the $48 million it still owes its own lenders with ever-increasing interest rates?
Purple’s consumers and employees should be a lot more interested in its views on these subjects than in its views on the proposed rates.
I have been worried about Purple for a while now. I am not sure they can last, regardless of the rate. They are not concerned about rates in their comments. They are concerned about Sorenson (unless there is some other “large provider” that I don’t know about) having the largest share. It seems to be all they think about. They can’t stop for a minute and be happy to get more per minute, and be more favored more as a tier two than they would be as a tier one in two of the possible proposals. There are pros and cons. But really, if you ask me, I think they’re just worried about their position. You can pump anti regulatory minutes all day and blame Sorenson for your problems all night and it still won’t get you anywhere.
I would like to commont on the trustworthy of Purple Communications.
Someone told me that Purple Communications Company is being sued by Dell Company for putting the “Purple” label over the “Dell” logo on the Dell computers and selling them as “P3″ computers and that the agreement between Purple and Dell was dismantled. Does anyone want to shed light on this issue?
Can Purple be trusted? Remember the infamous “Brown Bag Rewards” back in 2004 when HOVRS (now known as Purple) used Brown Bag Rewards to attract customers to join the program in exchange of illegal reimbursement of the high-speed internet service with condition that users used HOVRS.
Purple Communications’ trustworthy is questionable.
KJT,
Be very careful in making a statement you don’t know if true or not and got it from hearsay. I was referring to “Dell logo”. If this can be backed up by a reputable media news, by all means please provide link. If it was just “rumor” – be careful as it can be considered as a libel and Purple may take action.
eyes open & thumbs up…
It was posed as a question, and libel is usually a statement, but Purple needs the money. Don’t give them a reason to sue you I guess. The brown bag lunches were the least of it. Their expansion a few years ago was based on pumped minutes. Now, they’re learning to get along without that. I hope it works out. I always tell people that we have one Coke, no Pepsi, an RC Cola, and a bunch of Shasta’s. It’s important to hang onto the RC Cola, whether it ever becomes a Pepsi or not. Competition is important.